Cape Wind Farm

What is your opinion of the Cape Wind proposal?

  • I'm in favor of it.

    Votes: 101 87.8%
  • I'm against it.

    Votes: 13 11.3%
  • I don't care.

    Votes: 1 0.9%

  • Total voters
    115
100% in favor. Aside from the rising costs of energy today (and which only promises to grow more and more expensive as China and India suck up more of the world's petroleum supplies), wind is a free resource and there are precsious few spots in Massachusetts where wind farms like this are viable.

We all need to pay some price for our future energy needs and having a tiny speck of a windfarm on the horizon of Nantucket Sound is about the smallest price people in Hyannis could pay. I wonder how strongly the kind people of Nantucket and Hyannis would protest if someone prpposed a coal-fired power plant in Fitchburg. Didn't think so.
 
It's just a matter of time before this gets built. NIMBYs may squawk now, but eventually they won't be able to fight the growing need for clean renewable energy. Nantucket Sound is one of the best areas in the region for offshore windmills. The demand for clean power will be too strong in the future. Although, this is a chance for Massachusetts to blaze a trail.
 
Another delay. Ironically enough, maybe this delay will get this project through the recession instead of just killing it for lack of funding.

Foes of wind farm off Cape Cod sue state agency

February 25, 2009

BARNSTABLE, Mass. --A group fighting plans to build 130 wind turbines in the ocean waters off Cape Cod has challenged the findings of a state agency on the project.

The Alliance to Protect Nantucket Sound announced on Wednesday that it had filed a lawsuit in Barnstable Superior Court against the Massachusetts Office of Coastal Zone Management.

The agency ruled last month that the nation's first offshore wind farm would be consistent with state environmental policies for activities in federal waters.

In a statement, the alliance said the agency reached the decision prematurely and abandoned its own mission to protect coastal and marine resources.

A spokeswoman for coastal zone management said it was reviewing the lawsuit and had no immediate comment.

The wind farm's developer, Cape Wind Associates, termed the suit "another delay tactic," and predicted the agency's decision would stand.

Link
 
The little pinwheels that you guys are talking about in Hull and elsewhere have absolutely nothing to do with the Nantucket Sound project. The proposed turbines are 460 feet tall. that is just 6 stories short of the Prudential building. Also, those little prop-jobs, that look like Piper-Cub propellers, are not the models to be be used. The Cape Wind project's blades will be wide and over 100 feet long, like the models used in Ireland. Think of an old-fashioned electric fan blown up to massive proportions. Also never mentioned is the electric transfer station, the size and shape of an oil rig platform to be built on the "farm". The entire grid will be located 3 to 6 miles off shore between the cape and islands, covering 24 square miles.

Cape Wind has kept repeating the mantra that the project will produce "15% of the region's power needs". Region? New England, right? Wrong. Those figures are based on optimal conditions and the "region" is Cape Cod.

The other argument implied is that the wind is "free" so the electricity will be cheap! Wind powered turbines are actually the most expensive way of producing power. Just ask the residents of Palm Springs, where they get the majority of their electricity from the desert farm and pay the highest rates in the country. Land based props require constant maintenance, ocean based require even more.

Adding insult to injury, Cape Wind has successfully been using the old Class Warfare tactics of employing support from the bitter and angry. "It's all the richest of the rich who oppose this humanitarian project because they just want to hurt The People". And the fact that Ted Kennedy is opposed does not help the perception.

So why would Cape Wind want to invest all their money in this project if it is so bad and so inefficient? Because they ain't. They are investing OUR money in the form of Federal subsidies that had amounted to over 100 million dollars, but are probably now over 1 billion, what with us being all stimulated and everything. The site? Free. The expensively produced power? By law has to be bought into the grid. And just like condo developers in Florida, Cape Wind will write itself a long term maintenance contract. That's where the big bucks are. This is a massive scam as we have not seen since the 19th century railroad land-grab.

On top of everything else, the last viable economic engine in Massachusetts, tourism, is primarily centered on the Cape. We would be turning Nantucket Sound, one of the most historical waterways in the country, into an industrial power plant. The response to this complaint has been that tourists will flock to see the pretty windmills (that also are supposedly invisible below the horizon) and everybody will make even MORE money! Does that sound familiar? Remember when the anti-smoking crowd said that banning cigarettes in nightclubs would mean that people on respirators could then go out dancing and clubs would make even higher profits? They could verify those assertions if only they could find a club still open for business.
 
Going off-topic already, but I still see plenty of music clubs around -- Johnny D's, Toad, Lizard Lounge, TT the Bear's, Middle East, Cantab, Ryles, Lily Pad, Regattabar, just to name some on this side of the river.
 
Cape Wind has kept repeating the mantra that the project will produce "15% of the region's power needs". Region? New England, right? Wrong. Those figures are based on optimal conditions and the "region" is Cape Cod.

Is this true? I keep reading that they will produce 75%, not 15% of the Capes needs.

The other argument implied is that the wind is "free" so the electricity will be cheap! Wind powered turbines are actually the most expensive way of producing power. Just ask the residents of Palm Springs, where they get the majority of their electricity from the desert farm and pay the highest rates in the country. Land based props require constant maintenance, ocean based require even more.

I have no idea what is going on in Palm Springs, but isn't it true that many localities, such as Hull are enjoying energy cost savings as a result of the wind turbines they have built? And how are you measuring the cost of producing electric from different means? Do you have any reference guides you are going by here? Would like to see them.

So why would Cape Wind want to invest all their money in this project if it is so bad and so inefficient? Because they ain't. They are investing OUR money in the form of Federal subsidies that had amounted to over 100 million dollars, but are probably now over 1 billion, what with us being all stimulated and everything. The site? Free. The expensively produced power? By law has to be bought into the grid. And just like condo developers in Florida, Cape Wind will write itself a long term maintenance contract. That's where the big bucks are. This is a massive scam as we have not seen since the 19th century railroad land-grab.

I have read that Cape Wind will be paying royalties to the Federal Government as a result of the Federal Energy Policy Act of 2005. Is this not true? I'm not sure about the validity of the rest of your paragraph.


On top of everything else, the last viable economic engine in Massachusetts, tourism, is primarily centered on the Cape. We would be turning Nantucket Sound, one of the most historical waterways in the country, into an industrial power plant. The response to this complaint has been that tourists will flock to see the pretty windmills (that also are supposedly invisible below the horizon) and everybody will make even MORE money! Does that sound familiar? Remember when the anti-smoking crowd said that banning cigarettes in nightclubs would mean that people on respirators could then go out dancing and clubs would make even higher profits? They could verify those assertions if only they could find a club still open for business.

You really think that Tourism is the only remaining economic engine? Isn't a bit of hyperbole to suggest Nantucket would be a "Industrial power plant"? I'm all for examinng the impacts of the construction here, but can't we do it in an honest fashion?

PS: The smoking ban has had little or no effect of nightlife at all, and I can say this as a partner in an existing nightclub.
 
Is this true? I keep reading that they will produce 75%, not 15% of the Capes needs.

Everything i have ever read has said 75% of the cape. Maybe he was referring to that equating to 15% of the state?

This project will get built someday. The rest of the state overwhelmingly supports it.
 
It is 75% of the Cape + Nantucket + Martha's Vineyard.
 
Soon, the drone of the wind turbines will be so loud we won't have to listen to people complain about them.
 
Hoople,

Please help me out here, my arithmetic has proven flawed at times . . .

You say that these wind turbine structures proposed for the Cape Wind project are 460' tall.

Assuming you are correct with the height, and also assuming that the well-documented height of the Pru' is accurate (approximately 750'), then please explain to me how these proposed turbines are only 6 stories shorter than the Pru'??
 
^^And then the lawsuits. And another 5+ year delay.
 
Damn, late to the party on this thread. Just read through it and had a good laugh.

Wind turbines require maintenence - dear god no. Can't they run by themselves like coal/oil/gas burning power plants or nuclear plants. Maybe Ronco can make a power maker that you can just set and forget.

A fuel source that is supposedly free.... yes wind blows whether you put up a windmill or not. Oil, coal, natural gas, and uranium on the other hand are quite expensive and all produce byproducts that have negative impacts.

Only the very rich are bitching about this..... for the most part, yes. Who can see these? The people well off enough (or lucky enough to be part of an old cape family) to have water front property. If you ain't on the beach, you ain't seeing it. I can see the Pru and the Hancock from a few miles down the highway, but that's about it (which as stated above are considerably taller than 460'). I can see them from on top of Big Blue. But, again if you live on a bluff on the cape or Nantucket, you got some coin.

Are they expensive to put up (and the included powerplant to go with them)? Hell yes they are. Every power plant has a high upfront cost. They also don't last forever, and we are in the region of the country with the most antiquated plants in the country. Many of which have exceeded (by as much as double) their original life expectancies. So, sooner or later new power plants need to be built. And, when they are they should be as efficient and clean running as possible.

As a resident of Brockton, I am all for our proposed power plant, as a MA resident I am all for this wind farm. As and engineer I am all for nuclear power's return. A bunch of bitchy no nothings who stand in the way of these things be damned. Just like the Bio-Terror lab that is still making headlines as oftodays Metro. People who don't fully understand things should be less vocal, and the ones who nothing should be even quieter.

Now back to lunch.
 
Only the very rich are bitching about this..... for the most part, yes. Who can see these? The people well off enough (or lucky enough to be part of an old cape family) to have water front property. If you ain't on the beach, you ain't seeing it. I can see the Pru and the Hancock from a few miles down the highway, but that's about it (which as stated above are considerably taller than 460'). I can see them from on top of Big Blue. But, again if you live on a bluff on the cape or Nantucket, you got some coin.

Oddly enough, right now it is a Native American group that is leading the fight against this. This flies in the face of the whole 'crying Indian' stereotype that was fed to me as a child.
 
Oddly enough, right now it is a Native American group that is leading the fight against this. This flies in the face of the whole 'crying Indian' stereotype that was fed to me as a child.

From the Globe:

The project has undergone years of environmental review and political maneuvering, including opposition from the late Senator Edward M. Kennedy, whose home overlooked Nantucket Sound. While opponents' main concern is aesthetics -- the turbines would be visible low on the horizon from the Cape and islands of Martha's Vineyard and Nantucket -- the battle was fought by raising other issues, including possible effects on property values and harm to birds, fishing, aviation, and historic and cultural sites.

It's always been a NIMBY issue - even Ted would have been for this 'clean energy' project if it wasn't in his backyard.

Our economy needs more power, it should come from renewable sources, generation should be localized. Tell the NIMBYs they have to provide for their own power and give them a choice of wind, nuclear, or coal in their community.
 

No surprise there. If it wasn't them, someone else would spring up to sue.

Their argument is thin - there may be artifacts from indigenous peoples that may have lived there thousands of years ago. In that case... build nothing, nowhere. Plus, the sea bed is not static, buried artifacts don't stay buried. Think of how fast broken glass becomes smooth in the ocean, there's no Indian cemetery under Nantucket Sound.
 
Does anyone have a good link to a (preferrably neutral) source that does a realistic financial analysis of the Cape Wind project? I've only done a cursory search, but haven't found much - and what little I have found, either on wind power in general or this project in particular, has been pretty partisan stuff. Thanks.
________
Aprilia TXR312M
 
Last edited:

Back
Top